MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1968416256 · doi:10.4236/psych.2014.510132

Cosmetic Surgery as Intrasexual Competition: The Mediating Role of Social Comparison

2014· article· en· W1968416256 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEvolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
Canadian institutionsNipissing University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyCompetition (biology)Ecology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cosmetic surgical procedures have previously been associated with some risks to psychological and physical health. Yet such procedures are on the rise, highlighting the need for a better understanding of the factors which might underlie the decision to undergo cosmetic surgery. In a sample of 297 young adults (192 women), we examined the relationship between intrasexual competition (IC), social comparison, and individuals’ attitudes, perceived risks, and desired spending on cosmetic surgical procedures. Results showed that women perceived more risk to cosmetic surgery, yet held more positive attitudes and desire to spend on cosmetic surgery compared to men. For both men and women, IC predicted positive attitudes and desired spending on cosmetic surgery. Social comparison mediated all relationships between IC and cosmetic surgery variables. Cosmetic surgery is discussed as a potential form of intrasexual competition rooted in the mate-preferences of the opposite sex.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.696
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.341 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it